Linux-Advocacy Digest #317, Volume #33 Tue, 3 Apr 01 11:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. ("Scott D.
Erb")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Isaac)
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Sascha Bohnenkamp)
Re: Baseball ("David Brown")
Re: Something like Install Shield for Linux? (Andreas Spengler)
Re: AMD is to Intel as "What OS" is to Windows? ("Cat")
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Re: Communism confession
Re: AMD is to Intel as "What OS" is to Windows? ("Cat")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Scott D. Erb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 09:37:21 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Alex Chaihorsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9ab35s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erb,
> >
> > You have to be honest. We know you have problems with honesty.
> > But "Is" is "Is".
> > In the middle of the discussion you suddenly remembered that the original
> > meaning of Liberalism, which has nothing to do with contemporary
> Liberalism.
Actually, it does! Not only that, but in all countries in Europe the term
"liberal" is used to refer to the pro-business parties who desire less
government regulation (the FDP in Germany is an example). Thobaben and
Funderburk, in their book "Political Ideologies" trace how classical liberalism
moved to "new" liberalism with people like John Stuart Mill and liberal
reformers recognizing that you need government action to have the type of equal
opportunity for all that liberalism assumes; that otherwise powerful actors can
use their power to exploit others. The goal of new liberalism was not to create
socialism -- they still believed in the fundamental importance of liberty and
the basic idea of the rights of life, liberty and property. American "liberals"
are, for the most part, in that tradition. In fact, the vast majority of both
democrats and republicans owe their ideological roots to liberalism, it is the
fundamental American ideology for both parties. The so-called "right" tends
towards more classical liberalism, and the so-called "left" accepts the premises
of "new" liberalism and has expanded them. Some American "liberals" drift
towards Social Democracy, but they are the exception in American politics rather
than the rule.
> > Smart move. But may be it is me, who is dishonest here? let the readers
> > decide.
> > As you know, words, do not really mean anything on its own. Like many
> words
> > that describe groups and events on the political landscape, "Liberalism"
> > means different things at different times.
> > Liberalism in its original 18th century British form sought individual
> > liberties and was opposed to the growing power of the governments. The
> > American Constitution is the crescendo of Western Liberalism ideology.
> > Contemporary liberalism has nothing to do with it. Actually, it is almost
> > the exact opposite: - a collectivist ideology.
I disagree strongly there. American liberalism is not collectivist, compared to
real Socialism or European Social Democracy, most American liberals tend to be
seen as very individualist. Look at their policies and positions. Take awy the
more social democratic of American liberals (say Wellstone, Kennedy, Jackson),
and look at the mainstream of the Democratic party, and you see people who would
be in conservative or free market parties in Europe.
> But do not take my word for
> > it.
> > The Encyclopedia Britannica (1998 edition) defines the relation between
> the
> > two the best:
> > "The expansion of government power and responsibility sought by liberals
> > today is clearly opposed to the contraction of government power and
> > responsibility sought by liberals yesterday."
> > Please, everyone, re-read this passage again! Da ist der Hund begraben!
Eigentlich nicht. Again, I'd refer you to the Thobaben and Funderburk book, or
a book by Leon Baradat called "Political Ideologies" as well. The fact that
liberalism veered between classical liberals, who dominated early in the 19th
century in Britain, and an expanse of the new liberalism which emerged mid-19th
century in Britain doesn't deny the ideological link. The premises of the
ideology remain the same, even if the policies advanced are very different.
Socialism underwent similar splits. Social Democrats trace their roots back to
Marx, as do some anarcho-socialists. These groups are totally opposed to the
kind of totalitarianism of Stalin and the Communists, whose ideas also emerged
from early socialism.
> > Two most famous founders of liberalism, John Locke (1632-1704), the
> > philosopher of individual liberty and Adam Smith (1723?-1790), the author
> of
> > classical liberal laissez-faire economic theory are spinning in their
> graves
> > "listening" to what became of their ideology today.
I rather doubt it. Locke also talked about limits on rights if the exercise of
those rights denied the rights to others (esp. property rights). Mill and the
new liberals worked form aspects in Lockean and other early liberal thought.
Smith recognized that the theory he had was not magical, and that it required a
culture conducive to capitalism. However, I suspect Marx would be spinning in
his grave to see his ideas associated with Stalin or Mao. Ideological
development is complex.
> > In modern time, it was Margaret Thatcher, who represented classic
> liberalism
> > most eloquently. She, President Ronald Reagan and to some extent Secretary
> > General Gorbachev, were the most recent champions of the liberal cause in
> > its original form.
When I teach about political ideologies I make a point to note that Ronald
Reagan was a liberal. So was Thatcher. I want students to learn the
distinction between the terminology used by political philosophers and that used
in every day political jargon. We then look at how the words changed over time,
what the core assumptions of the ideology are, etc.
> I bow in deep respect to these noble giants of
> > liberalism, to who we owe our recent victories over the monster of the
> world
> > Communism.
I doubt you can credit them with that. They helped make the demise of communism
more peaceful than it could have been, but it was an unworkable sick system that
was collapsing in on itself anyway. It was doomed to fall, but without the work
of the leaders of the time, the fall could have been much more deadly and noisey
than it was!
> > That has nothing to do with socialists and communists that have stolen the
> > word (as they always do, because they have to distance themselves from the
> > horrors of their original ideology).
Most Social Democrats and western Socialists were extremely anti-Communist.
Kurt Schumacher, a West German who proudly called himself a Socialist labeled
the East bloc Communists "red painted fascists." The Social Democrats in
Germany (SPD) split with the Soviet Union in response to the revolution, with
the Communist party forming in response (KPD). The Social Democrats fought to
save the Weimar Republic, combating both the Nazis and the KPD in street fights
and political battles. In the end, the SPD was the only major party wanting to
keep democracy in Germany, and the only party to vote against the Enabling Act
giving Hitler complete power. German liberal parties (ideological liberalism)
and nationalist parties voted to hand over power to Hitler. Trying to tie
Social Democrats to the evil ideology (yes, evil -- the Soviets had an evil
empire) is as misguided as trying to claim conservatives are the same as Nazis.
> > So, Dana is right, and if you claim that Liberal Democracy definition
> today
> > has retain the meaning of Liberalism of the 18th century, you have to
> become
> > small government, no free lunch, individualist, which you are obviously
> NOT.
The definition of Liberal Democracy is clear in the books I cited: it is a
Democratic Republic based on protecting individual rights of life, liberty and
property, ideological liberalism. That is not a usage I invented, it is from
those books I cited: Comparative Politics by Charles Hauss, West Publishing;
European Democracies by Juerg Steiner, Longman Publishers, etc. That isn't even
a controversy.
> > But we would like you to be that. What would it take for you to abandon
> > your socialist agenda? Yet another tens of millions of tortured and killed
> > by Communist NKVD-KGB? More artificial hunger like in 1920-ies in Ukraine
> > that caused the biggest outbreak of documented cannibalism known to
> men?
Again, note the above: almost all western Socialists despise Communism. I agree
with Schumacher, they were red painted fascists, nothing more.
Second, if you read the thread I started called "Left Libertarianism," you'd
recognize that I share with you a profound mistrust of state power. Your error
is to believe Dana, he's constantly lying and issuing personal attacks that have
no basis in reality. I ask you to read my ideas and respond to them, and
believe flames from someone who, if you look at his threads, is known as a
flamester.
> More
> > dead bodies than you already had in Cambodia?
> > I remember how "Comrade Pol Pot" was marching down the hall of the Palace
> of
> > Communism in Moscow during XXIV World Communist Congress. How General
> > Secretary Of the Communist Party of USA - Guss Hall (we called him "Gas
> > Hall") was standing next to him, apploading. Cambodia was in the middle of
> > the its carnage at the time, but American Communists an Socialist were
> > there, in Moscow, applauding the butcher.
> > You hope that we forgot. No, Erb. Americans forgot, kind souls that they
> > are, we didn't.
Nor have I, which is why I am against powerful government, and believe that the
most important aspect of politics today is to hold governments accountable for
their action. I am on record supporting decentralization of power, openness of
government, and other actions to make the abuse of power more difficult. Any
time you centralize power, either in a big corporation or a big government or a
big Mafia, you get risks. The challenge of politics is to prevent that power
centralization while still achieving effective governance. The focus, in my
opinion, must be on ethics.
cheers, scott
http://violet.umf.maine.edu/~erb/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Isaac)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 13:39:37 GMT
On Tue, 03 Apr 2001 06:13:40 -0700, Jeffrey Siegal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I'm aware of the reverse engineering cases, which attempt to apply
>copyright law to impede the ability to produce unauthorized games but
>that is somewhat different than applying copyright law to prohibit end
>users from from using unauthorized games. Have there been such cases?
I suspect that very few games players ever get sued for copyright
violations, and that only under the rarest of situations would such
a suit result in a court decision. I'll bet there haven't been any
such cases.
Perhaps the reverse engineering cases have dealt with the issue at
least to dismiss contributory infringement claims. I'll go hunt
them down to see.
Isaac
------------------------------
From: Sascha Bohnenkamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 16:02:26 +0200
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> It's not exactly running as root, but it has privileged access to hardware.
sure? imho XF_somewhat is suid-root
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Baseball
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 15:53:52 +0200
Matthew Gardiner wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Ever played rugby? Ever been in the position of having a 140KG Somoan
charging towards you
>(and you're only 85KG), and being hammered when trying to tackle the
person? I also find
>it rather amazing how little Septic Tanks know about the world outside the
US? Did you
>know we have Televisions, Tree's, cars, computers, I know, its probably has
come as quite a
>big shock to you.
They should do - after all, both televisions and computers were invented in
the UK (don't know about trees or cars).
>
>Matthew Gardiner
>
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>> Said Matthew Gardiner in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 03 Apr 2001
>> >Cricket is not gay, NOW Gridiron, that is really gay, wtf is it with
pads and shit? and
>> >a 15'er after each tackle for christs. I've seen more action from a
Microsoft
>> >programmer than what happens on the field in a game of Gridiron.
>>
>> They like to think its a game of strategy.
The strategy being to be bigger, faster, and stupider than the opponent
team.
>>
>> Do you think there's more strategy in cricket then in baseball? I've
>> watched both, but I know the rules and strategy to baseball, having
>> grown up American. They're both pretty boring. I'm interested in
>> learning a bit of some of the strategy. It seems a really wacked game
>> from the brief descriptions I've heard.
I don't know about strategy, but at least baseball is fun to play. How
anyone could find cricket interesting is beyond me.
>>
>> But "gridiron" ('American football') is about *mass*, not *flexibility*,
>> that's wtf with the pads and shit. Rugby (isn't that what you guys call
>> your version of gridiron?) is for pansies, in comparison. You might as
>> well play soccer.
I think you'll find that American "football" is your version of rugby,
rather than the other way round. In my youth, I tried to understand the
concepts of American football. As you say, mass is important, whereas
flexibility, skill and intelligence seem sadly lacking. As far as I
understand it, there are a couple of players who need to be reasonably
skillful (good throwers, runners or kickers), whereas everyone else just
needs to charge mindlessly at each other and get in the way. The players
all wear so much armour instead of being smart enough and fast enough to get
out of the way. They then need five minute breaks every two minutes of play
to recover. Rugby, on the other hand, is a game of speed and skill as well
as strength.
>>
>> --
>> T. Max Devlin
>> *** The best way to convince another is
>> to state your case moderately and
>> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>
------------------------------
From: Andreas Spengler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Something like Install Shield for Linux?
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 15:53:10 +0200
mlw schrieb:
> Yes, I know about "configure" and "make," but for binary distribution, is
> there an open source installer? One, gasp, which is pretty and
> programmable, will switch to root to perform the install? If so I haven't
> seen it.
Then open your eyes ;-) and look on Lokisofts page, esp. the one with the
OpenSource Projects...
Greets,
Andreas
--
"Bitte beachten Sie, dass gerade auf der Windows(tm) Plattform jede kleine
Veraenderung und/oder Installation zu nachhaltigen Systemstoerungen fuehren
kann." [Tipp der 1822direkt auf deren Online-Banking Seiten]
------------------------------
From: "Cat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: AMD is to Intel as "What OS" is to Windows?
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 00:15:25 +1000
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
How do you improve the state of computing if no one uses it because you have no third
party
applications.
Cat
http://www.ratrobot.com/sport/sport.htm NEW THIS MONTH Would you cheat in a $100
million
dollar lottery if you knew they wouldn't catch you? This is the problem with drugs in
sport.
How do we solve it?
http://www.ratrobot.com/java/ratrobot_help.jar FREE APPLETS JARS EDITORS CHOICE
www.ratrobot.com Articles that challenge your ideas about yourself and the world you
live in.
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Cat wrote:
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > > Your assumptions for why Windows is dominant is flawed. You assume that it's a
>good
> > > idea to try and emulate Windows by "engineering an OS from scratch with the
>objective of
> > > being as close to the windows platform as possible". It is not.
> > I never said that windows was a great design I just said that it is 95% of the
>desktop
> > market and incompatible with Linux etc. The objective is to open up the market.
> >
>
> No...the objective is to IMPROVE THE STATE OF COMPUTING.
>
> Replicating the same stupid errors as Microsoft won't accomplish anything.
>
>
> > Cat
> >
> > http://www.ratrobot.com/sport/sport.htm NEW THIS MONTH Would you cheat in a $100
>million
> > dollar lottery if you knew they wouldn't catch you? This is the problem with drugs
>in
> > sport. How do we solve it?
> > http://www.ratrobot.com/java/ratrobot_help.jar FREE APPLETS JARS EDITORS CHOICE
> > www.ratrobot.com Articles that challenge your ideas about yourself and the world
>you live
> > in.
> >
> > "Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Your assumptions for why Windows is dominant is flawed. You assume that it's a
>good
> > > idea to try and emulate Windows by "engineering an OS from scratch with the
>objective of
> > > being as close to the windows platform as possible". It is not.
> > >
> > > Your statements about Linux are also incorrect (see below).
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 01:19:01 +1000, Cat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >I was considering the reasons for windows dominance of the OS market and the
>huge
> > > >problems of getting developers for Linux, Mac etc. Linux is a solution to a
>different
> > > >problem that just happens to have been successful in some desktop areas. It's a
>port of
> > > >Unix to a Intel box pure and simple. The Mac OS developed before and
>simultaneously
> > > >with windows platform and so it fundamentally different to it.
> > >
> > >
> > > Linux is NOT a "port of unix to a Intel box pure and simple". Linux runs on
>x86, AMD,
> > > PowerPC, Alpha, IBM S/390, embedded devices, and probably more that I am
>forgetting.
> > > This is clearly more than "unix ported to an Intel box pure and simple"
> > >
> > >
> > > > I was wondering if anyone has ever considered doing to the OS market what
>AMD did
> > > > to the
> > > >chip market. Why not engineer an OS from scratch with the objective of being as
>close
> > > >to the windows platform as possible for application development? You could make
>it open
> > > >source and free and include Java and other cross platform API in all
>distributions.
> > > > It would certainly be a big investment but their would still be enough
>money in the
> > > >coffers of companies like Sun and IBM to do it. Assuming that they had the right
> > > >business plan from the start. Which is to make it free for the client side and
>low cost
> > > >and scalable for the server side until you got a significant % of the client
>side
> > > >market.
> > >
> > > You have many flawed assumptions in your above statements.
> > >
> > > > If I could run a free OS that allowed me to run virtually all of the
>software that
> > > > runs on
> > > >windows I would even think about paying for windows.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Huh? Just buy Windows then.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> > > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> > - -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
> >
> > iQA/AwUBOsh/YSh0Y2LcENUAEQJs1QCfR5VEQdl3Iziyl1hQ/3NqC2bkKd0AoJSg
> > vujF5nZ0viGDW3FD+vtIiNb3
> > =U/2J
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
> Special Interest Sierra Club,
> Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
>
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
>
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOslOXSh0Y2LcENUAEQKUkACfY1hmm6kd9Yk4Z0efD5c4VB2bujAAn3h0
r+I9w1XzXb9BV44+fd3l65lF
=Rjyb
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 14:14:50 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> Mathew wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>> > >
>> > > Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>> > > >>
>> > > Aaron> Mathew wrote:
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> For a person who constantly calls people"little dictators"
>> > > >> >> and "fascists" , Aaron certainky takes the cake for personifying
>> > > >> >> his own words.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> A product of fascist military indoctrination ,no doubt.
>> > > >>
>> > > Aaron> So, protecting your constitutional rights is fascist now.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> You have repeatedly threatened to kill people for their political
>> > > >> beliefs. That is not protecting their Constitutional Rights.
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> > > Aaron> No, I have not.
>> > >
>> > > Yes you have. You have said that people should be killed for
>> > > merely being democrats.
>> >
>> > No. They should be punished for committing treason.
>> >
>> > The most egregious, such as Clinton, should be executed.
>>
>> And the the totalitarin regime in Afghanistan,that happnened because Bush
>> Sr. sold their freedom down the drain?
Aaron> [Note that once again, Matthew is advocating for the Communists...and
Aaron> he *still* claims he's not a weaselly Marxist bastard].
Aaron> What freedom? When?
Aaron> Afghanistan has *NEVER* had any freedom....and in fact, has never had
Aaron> ANY force which represents freedom fighting for it.
This is true, and clearly shows Reagan to have been lying
when he called the thugs he armed "Freedom Fighters".
Aaron> Hope that helps.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism confession
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 14:16:37 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>>
Aaron> You know...name some Communist-style government policies that
Aaron> you disagree with.
>>
>> Forgery alert, the original statement by the liar Mr. Kulkis was
>> "that you agree with". He, unwilling to admit his error, chose
>> to lie.
>>
>> His original statement was in message id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> >> >> Can't think of any in the real world.
>>
Aaron> then you're a Communist.
>>
>> >> Because I do not agree with any of their policies?
>>
Aaron> You just said that you can't think of any that you do disagree with.
>>
>> You are a cowardly lying sack of shit.
>>
>> >>
>> >> Please explain your "logic"?
>> >>
Aaron> Thank you for admitting that you are an enemy of the US Constitution.
>> >>
>> >> No, that would be you, for your communist like calls for the deaths
>> >> of those that disagree with you.
Aaron> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
Aaron> You misspelled "have contempt for the Constitution"
>>
>> No, you are lying, again.
>>
Aaron> This fact will be recorded for posterity.
>>
>> >> What you imagine to be facts and reality seldom concur.
>>
Aaron> Heheheheheheh
>>
>> Shut up forger.
Aaron> Pot Snow Black.
No, unlike you I tell the truth.
Kulkis, cowardly lying forger. And I have the proof.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
From: "Cat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: AMD is to Intel as "What OS" is to Windows?
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 00:20:00 +1000
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
> how about "good client side performance"? Or haven't you noticed how
> few real applications there are written in 100% Java?
Please, how many are written with any Java content at all? Less than 0.001% and if that
doesn't send you back to the drawing board what will?
Cat
http://www.ratrobot.com/sport/sport.htm NEW THIS MONTH Would you cheat in a $100
million
dollar lottery if you knew they wouldn't catch you? This is the problem with drugs in
sport.
How do we solve it?
http://www.ratrobot.com/java/ratrobot_help.jar FREE APPLETS JARS EDITORS CHOICE
www.ratrobot.com Articles that challenge your ideas about yourself and the world you
live in.
"none" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 2 Apr 2001 18:55:20 -0700, pete@- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >In article <9aaslu$vq3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "2 says...
> >
> >>This being the case, then the open source movement, already having an OS,
> >>needs a framework and execution engine of its own.
> >>
> >
> >No they don't. Java is here.
>
> Hail hail the all powerful Java! No one needs anything else!
>
> >What is it that you need that Java and corba and RMI and XML do not
> >give you?
>
> how about "good client side performance"? Or haven't you noticed how
> few real applications there are written in 100% Java?
>
> >the .net and c-hash is a desparate attempt by billy to keep control
> >inside him, and it failing miserbly.
>
> how is it failing?
>
> If you want to talk failures, lets talk about Jini.... oh, you don't
> want to?
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
> With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOslPcCh0Y2LcENUAEQLyIwCgrttzdzd2Gyjwb1yjfRSj+p/9+I8An0Pk
SdErxBgkG04QUq+dUiSlzr4a
=fFqc
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
